My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council Work Session - 09/11/2012
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council Work Session
>
2012
>
Agenda - Council Work Session - 09/11/2012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/18/2025 12:23:13 PM
Creation date
9/6/2012 4:41:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
09/11/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
174
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Raw Data <br />Explanatory Notes <br />CPM 101 Annual Report: FY2011 Highways & Road Maintenance /57 <br />If your local government participates in CPM 101, you may access the raw data for this report on the <br />CPM 101 Knowledge Network group located here. For assistance on accessing the group or locating the <br />file, please send an e-mail to CPM (cpmmail@ icma.org). (Non - participants do not receive access to the <br />raw data.) <br />Figure 5 - 2 <br />• A number of jurisdictions note that the actual expenditures they report differ greatly from year to <br />year owing to events such as an increase in capital funds, the delay of a major capital contract, or <br />other changes in the availability of funds. <br />• Some differences in road rehabilitation expenditures may be attributable to external factors such as <br />weather conditions, natural disasters, and legislative mandates. Differences may also result from <br />internal factors such as deferred maintenance policies. <br />Figure 5 - 4 <br />• Some jurisdictions assess a percentage of their roadways each year while others assess only those <br />that are in need of replacement or repair. As a result, the paved lane miles that a jurisdiction elects <br />to assess may not be a representative sample of its total paved lane miles. <br />• Even though participants are required to submit road condition information collected from <br />standardized assessment systems like PAVER, such trained observer ratings remain somewhat <br />subjective. Additionally, jurisdictions set different minimum scores as "satisfactory." <br />Figure 5 - 5 <br />• Citizen ratings of road condition may be artificially high or low, because of citizens' perceptions of <br />the condition of roadways within the jurisdiction that are maintained by agencies other than the <br />local government conducting the survey. A jurisdiction may have a high proportion of federally <br />maintained or state - maintained roadways within its boundaries, and these roadways may be <br />maintained to a different standard than the locally maintained roadways. Because residents are <br />likely to be unaware of which government maintains each segment of roadway, they may judge the <br />quality of road maintenance performed by their local government on the basis of the condition of <br />roadways maintained by other jurisdictions. Alternatively, citizens who commute through a number <br />of communities may rate the condition of locally maintained roadways on the basis of their entire <br />route, without regard for jurisdictional boundaries. <br />OICMA Center for Performance Measurement'" <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.